CASE#32

PEOPLE VS. HON. A. PURISIMA

FACTS:
1.26 petitions for review were filed by the people of the Philippines
regarding informations that were filed charging the accused of “illegal
possession of deadly weapon” in violation of Presdiential Decree No. 9 to the
Court of First Instance of Manila Branch 7.
2. Judge Purisima dismissed the case on the grounds that the information
did not indicate the accused to be penalized by Presidential Decree No. 9
because it failed to state one essential element of the crime, which is, that
carrying outside of a bladed, pointed, or blunt weapon is in furtherance, or
on the occasion of, connected with, or related to subversion, insurrection, or
rebellion, organized lawlessness or public disorder.
3. Petitioners brought the case up to Supreme Court with a motion to quash.

ISSUE: W/N the informations filed by the people were sufficient to

constitute violation of the Illegal possession of deadly weapon penalized
under PD 9?

RULING: No, informations were not sufficient. As a Cardinal Rule, legislative

intent to ascertain the statute as a whole not as isolated part.

Therefore, the Court considered the Preamble which shows the legislative
intent as a primary rule to search for and determine the intent and spirit of
the law.

Also, the court added and applied the salutary principle that valid
presumption that undesirable consequences were never intended by a
legislative measure.

Therefore, the Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the orders of
the respondent Judges.